About your Search

20120925
20121003
Search Results 0 to 8 of about 9 (some duplicates have been removed)
years but in virginia specifically not all states are equal. we still fight civil rights in virginia and we have a state where they want to go backward it appears. now the federal government is doing a great job intervening in the delivery of recovery support services, meaning those federal dollars the come from virginia. to me it would make sense to make them spend a small portion on recovery support services to include housing. housing is a critical missing element in recovery so i guess my thought process to samhsa and somehow force the state to discriminate against recovery like they do in virginia and spend some of those dollars on the authentic recovery and support service. that really is the nature of my thought process. by doing so we could really reduce the recidivism and increase recovery. the power to recover people is incredible and to block out the recovery principle from delivering those services, but like i say the state is not going to change but the federal government if you would just make a rule or regulation with those federal -- you have to spend a small amount o
to get ahead of things, the plaintiffs here are attorneys, civil rights activists and others who are in regular contact with people overseas particularly people who might well be the subject of electronic surveillance by the federal government and they are challenging the law that allows electronic surveillance, this wiretapping because they're concerned that their case will be picked up. they're claiming to have standing to challenge this law because even though the surveillance might be directed overseas to people they're talking to get their dedication will get picked up in the course of that surveillance and so therefore they have the right to challenge it in court. that is the standing issue we we are dealing with. just to get to the merits for a minute, and the aftermath of the exposÉ in the mid-70's about various abuses in the intelligence community and in short in short is set up a system by which the executive branch would have to go to the court surveillance court here in d.c. and get permission when they wanted to do wiretapping for national security purpose to give s
, engaged the senators in discussion of how he felt about the issues, and it became clear he felt the civil rights act, a thomas just think, he thought there was no such thing as a right to privacy to the constitution, and the senate by a vote of 58-42 said to conservative and he was voted down. ronald reagan nominated instead to that seat anthony kennedy, who was serving a liberal but was certainly no robert bork either. and he has had a long and distinguished career as, now the swing vote on the court. and that really, that set, that really set up the rehnquist years. accord which i wrote about in my last book, "the nine," and when i started looking at the supreme court in a serious way as a writer, i was inspired by book that i'm sure is familiar to many of you called the brethren by scott armstrong and bob woodward, really a great book, first real behind the scenes book of the supreme court. and 15, the theme of the book was also justices, regardless of politics couldn't stand were in burger. they thought he was at pompous jerk. that sort of contention has been the rule more than the ex
with civil rights of the '60s. >> host: john is from illinois now. john is an independent. hi there. >> caller: hi. mr. johnson, the only problem i have is about the tax issue. and the reason why it's like -- the reason why i say that is, our taxes in this country have never been set at actually to be fair. what they were set up for originally was that the rich were supposed to pay the majority of their taxes in federal taxes, and the working class and the poor were supposed to pay most of -- the majority of theirs in home owners taxes, city and state taxes. and that has been all -- it's got everything out of sorts. my problem with what everybody calls a fair tax is, when you're on a fixed income, and these states are going to have to have such a high tax rate because the federal government is going to have such a lower one, that when anybody that is on a fixed tax rate goes in and buys a refrigerator, they cost $400, the lowest one they can buy, they have about $100 tax on the refrigerator. that is the problem. and the only ones it's going to hurt is people that are retired, people
these cases can be so big they can be exported. civil-rights concerned about cutting back on class-action. too expensive to litigate each case one by one. the justices in the comcast case will consider the question of how much judges should decide about the case before certifying and saying everyone can be in all the lawsuits together. do they have to figure route if all these people and have one theory of damages or have to look at whether there was a fraud or securities fraud case so there will be more in line of the wal-mart decision about class-action procedure? two tiny actions. people in college try to get text books that are not incredibly expensive. the supreme court has a copyright case about what happens with market goods. text books made overseas when sold at a lower price are imported to the united states. producer of that book or any other copyrighted material have a right to limit it coming into the united states and actually a body on the questions of when a lawsuit is moved. a very lawyer the the the the issue but those who are interested and are practicing lawyers there are fi
strengthening our economy that we defend the civil liberties and rights of every new hampshire citizen because we want to attract people of all -- of talent and energy to the states meaning defending our marriage equality law and making sure that women can chart their own destinies making their own health care decisions. >> a lot of the public debate between you has been on social issues. now, any of the social issues that you disagree on, how much impact do they have on the economy in the business of new hampshire? >> you know? i was on a plane last spring, and i sat next to a young man who recruits for business, and he told me how important the marriage equality law we passed was to his recruiting efforts because young people were interested in coming to new hampshire to worng here because we were committed to treating all granted staters equally. similarly, for women, the ability to make their own decisions about when to have families, about what kind of balance they want to seek in the workplace, finishing schools, and all of those things relate to their ability to control their own decisi
involve actual involvement on the ground. i don't know the attitude that either. so right now i think we are kind of, we are kind of in a difficult position where it's horrible to see these things unfold every day on television, but it is a civil war. and you hope you can find a point of fatigue reached on the part of both sides so the and then try to find a kind of peaceful resolution. it's not very peaceful after what you've seen what's been done in the cities with all the loss of life. but i think neither side is close to that point of fatigue, and i do not see anyone really coming to a solution involving the use of military force to break the elections apart, or to oppose a settlement on the situation. so it's going to continue to be ugly for a long period of time. can't tell you how long. it might be two weeks. it might be to use. remember what his father was prepared to do back in the early '80s, killing 80,000 people, and not giving up alawite control of that country. and that's what assad is facing. not just his personal destiny and his family, but his whole people. >> okay, than
of principles that we agree with with pakistan on afghanistan. i think neither of us want to see the civil war. we should find that basis. the question people are struggling with right now with the right mechanism in the bilateral relationship, but the right mechanism to pull people together to find those things we have in common. anyone in the last month or six weeks there've been developments i'm not privy to but i sense i'm moving ahead. per your question is a good one. we don't have, to my knowledge, we have not achieved the kind of meeting of minds on afghanistan that were going to need for this process up to 2014 and beyond 2014 to address. so it is an open question i agree if there is a tough one, that is the. i'm an independent consultant and i have a couple of questions that pick up on other points that i believe you made. if i understood you correctly, you really suggesting that we start our relations when people share our values. i'm sympathetic to that idea. i wanted first to make a comment, which many of those people in some sense identified with our values or goals are at least s
Search Results 0 to 8 of about 9 (some duplicates have been removed)

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)